doctrine #6 - contextualisation

Full credit to the continuously magnificent Jon Birch @ AsboJesus


Question: What are the limits of contextualisation and inculturation?

Contextualisation of a church and its theology is somewhat of a balancing act: on one end, the Word; on the other, the indigenous culture; and at the pivot, the fledgling body of believers trying to make sense and gain an understanding of it all. I can immediately envision three key problematic areas in this.

Firstly, the more a church adapts to a specific culture, the more danger there is of it becoming homogeneous – that is, composed of elements specific to that culture, logically therefore running the risk of being closed to those from other backgrounds. A church must always maintain a welcoming, all-inclusive nature ahead of giving any population complete ownership.

Secondly, there is the issue of syncretism – the attempt to reconcile contrary ideas, and melding practices together despite opposing practices. In some areas of the church, fusion of methodologies should not be problematic, such as finding a good style of music for a worship setting. But there has to be a limit. For example, different methods of leadership may be appropriate and recognizable to different cultural settings; indeed, a missionary may wish to structure a congregation in a way that reflects local tradition. But consider if oppression, even violence, towards women was prevalent locally – this is not something the leadership of a church could reflect in its decision-making, as it goes directly against Christian values

In truth, we realise that on our seesawing scales of Word and culture, the poles are not really balanced – and so thirdly and finally, inculturation must be limited, with the one fluctuating pole (culture) in practice filtered out by its steadfast opponent (the Word). I therefore conclude that although methodologies can always be contextual, the Word is not; and like so many things, the real balancing act is not to find a line down the middle of the two poles to deliver a message, but to, in fact, keep that very message – the Gospel message – central at all costs.


Editor's note: There was a bibliography for this essay, but the named articles are not freely available (journals, etc.). Boo, and indeed, hiss.